Content deleted Content added
Line 302:
:{{re|Pinoczet}} From a quick overview I think you're right. The classification still seems to be uncommonly used recently though, so it may be worth looking into a little further. E.g. Some papers refer to [[miniature inverted repeat transposable elements|MITEs]] as Class III ([https://www.pnas.org/content/115/28/E6650.short example]), whereas others refer to MITEs as Class II ([https://bmcbioinformatics.biomedcentral.com/articles/10.1186/s12859-018-2376-y example]). [[User:Evolution and evolvability|T.Shafee(Evo<small>&</small>Evo)]]<sup>[[User talk:Evolution and evolvability|talk]]</sup> 05:57, 27 August 2021 (UTC)
::Thank you for the reply. Yes, exactly. To my knowledge, the examples include Foldbacks, TU elements, and MITEs. It seems these transposable elements may be and actually are considered Class III TEs, at least by some researchers. However, I am not sure how this information should be properly added to the article. E.g. whether it deserves a separate subsection, or perhaps just a brief side note would be sufficient? Since I am not an expert in this field, I decided to contact you. Kind regards, --[[User:Pinoczet|Pinoczet]] ([[User talk:Pinoczet|talk]]) 04:45, 28 August 2021 (UTC)
:::{{re|Pinoczet}} I think it's probably worth noting at the end of the ''Classification'' section, especially clarifying what the unifying features are as compared to class I and II and noting that the category is not as frequently used as the others. [[User:Evolution and evolvability|T.Shafee(Evo<small>&</small>Evo)]]<sup>[[User talk:Evolution and evolvability|talk]]</sup> 08:52, 28 August 2021 (UTC)
| |||